HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 3816 of 2025 Court No. - 72 HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J. 1. Supplementary affidavit filed by the learned counsel for the applicant today is taken on record. 2. Heard Sri Sanjay Kumar, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri V.K. Maurya, learned counsel for the first informant and Sri Chandra Shekhar Saran, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 3. The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Complaint Case No. 60 of 2023, under Sections 147, 148, 307, 323, 435, 504, 506, 452, 429 IPC and Section 3(1)(x) SC/ST Act, Police Station Bansdeeh Road, District Ballia with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicants may be released on bail. 4. It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicants that applicants are innocent and they have an apprehension that they may be arrested in the above-mentioned case. He further submits that no offence is made out against the applicants. It is further submitted that on similar set of facts and on similar incident a first information report was earlier lodged by the first informant against the applicants in which chargesheet was submitted. It is further submitted after submission of the chargesheet, the first informant filed an application under Section 156(3) CrPC alleging therein she was not satisfied with the investigation of the earlier case, therefore, present prosecution has been filed which has been treated as a complaint case. It is further submitted that two prosecution cannot be lodged for the Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Sanjay Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Vikas Pal, Vinod Kumar Maurya Anant Tiwari And 2 Others .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) same offence. He has placed reliance on a judgement of Hon'ble Apex Court rendered in the case of Prathvi Raj Chauhan vs. Union of India and others, 2020 AIR (SC) 1036 wherein it has been held that when a prima facie case is not made out under the SC/ST Act, application for anticipatory bail is maintainable for the offences under the SC/ST Act. It is also submitted that the criminal history of the applicants has been explained in the supplementary affidavit. It is also submitted that applicants undertake to cooperate during trial and they would appear as and when required by the investigating agency or Court. It is lastly submitted that in case applicants are granted anticipatory bail, they shall not misuse the liberty of bail and they will cooperate with the investigation and would obey all conditions of bail. 5. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the first informant have opposed the application for anticipatory bail, however, they do not dispute the legal aspect of the matter. 6. I have considered the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties. 7. First informant is said to have earlier lodged an FIR in which chargesheet has been submitted. After submission of the chragesheet, first informant is said to have filed an application under Section 156(3) alleging therein that the first informant was not satisfied with the Sections imposed by the Investigating Officer, therefore, this application has been filed which has been treated as a complaint case. The criminal history of the applicants has been explained in the supplementary affidavit. 8. It may be stated that in case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra, (2011) 1 SCC 694, it has been held by Hon'ble Supreme Court that while deciding anticipatory bail, the Court must consider nature and gravity of accusation, antecedent of accused, possibility of accused to flee from justice and that Court must evaluate entire available material against the accused carefully and that the exact role of the accused has also to be taken into consideration. 9. Considering the settled principle of law regarding anticipatory bail, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusation, NABAIL No. 3816 of 2025 2 role of applicants and all attending facts and circumstances of the case as well as the law down by Hon'ble Apex Court in Prathvi Raj Chauhan (supra) and the fact that first informant had earlier lodged an FIR in which chargesheet has been submitted, without expressing any opinion on merits, a case for anticipatory bail is made out. 10. The anticipatory bail application is allowed. 11. In the event of arrest of the applicants- Anant Tiwari, Vikas Tiwari and Udai Shanker Tiwari involved in the aforesaid case crime, they shall be released on anticipatory bail on their furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned, with the following conditions :- (i) The applicants shall not tamper with evidence and that they would appear before the trial Court on the date fixed unless exempted by the Court concerned; (ii) The applicants shall not directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her/them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; (iii) The applicants would cooperate during trial and would not misuse the liberty of bail. (iv) The applicants shall not leave India without prior permission of the Court concerned. 12. In default of any of the conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicants herein. October 17, 2025 Abhishek NABAIL No. 3816 of 2025 3 (Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.) Digitally signed by :- ABHISHEK AGRAHARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad